poor old hitler

Originally posted by twhitehead
You clearly do not understand the purpose of punishment at all. Knightmeister has a similar problem as he believes in the Christian idea of punishment as a form of payment not as a method of correction.

In society we punish to correct behavior and occasionally as a form of revenge but that is an evolved tendency not a logical one. We do not punish beca ...[text shortened]... a random process?
knightmeister and you appear to be making that claim but hating the word.[/b]

Knightmeister has a similar problem as he believes in the Christian idea of punishment as a form of payment not as a method of correction. WHITEY

Since we have had very little discussion on punishment this can only be mind reading.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Boy this is repetitive! I choose choice A because I will that choice--- the determining factor is me. Why do I will choice A over B and for what reason? - the reason is choice A itself and me willing it. Why would I choose choice B instead? - because of the reasons attached to choice B and my willing of choice B over A. The reason is me. There is nothi ...[text shortened]... ORCE the choice. Therefore , there is a rationale to the choice as well as a free will element.

But your 'free will element' essentially behaves randomly whether you like the word or not. I know you are trying your best to muddy the waters by continually trying to hold onto the reasons for A or B, but we both know that the ultimate deciding factor between the two is your will and that as you say acts "in a non forced , non-determined manner" ie random. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, it fits the definition of random and so it must be called.
There is no reason why on any given choice, your will will "tip the balance in favour" of A or for B. So why should you be blamed or held responsible? You are at the mercy of chance. And so was Hitler.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Since we have had very little discussion on punishment this can only be mind reading.

We had a whole thread on it (The wayward computer).

Originally posted by twhitehead
We had a whole thread on it (The wayward computer).

That debate was about responsibility largely , we did not get on to a Christian theology of punishment or sin , it is an area we have not discussed.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But your 'free will element' essentially behaves randomly whether you like the word or not. I know you are trying your best to muddy the waters by continually trying to hold onto the reasons for A or B, but we both know that the ultimate deciding factor between the two is your will and that as you say acts "in a non forced , non-determined manner" ie rand ...[text shortened]... ould you be blamed or held responsible? You are at the mercy of chance. And so was Hitler.

The reason why the balance is tipped in favour of A or B is my willing A or B , therefore there is a reason for this choice - namely my will - there is also something determining said choice - namely me- Thus the choice has both a determining factor (me) and a reason for the choice (I willed it) . Added to this there is a rationale for the choice - namely the rationale attached to the choices A or B. The difference with free will is there is no external forcing of the choice or any inner dynamics that force the choice either.

One might ask me why did I choose Christ freely. There would be all sorts of rationale to my choice (as illustrated in these threads) but ultimately I chose Christ because I willed it. It was a self determined , self willed choice with a whole rationale of thoughts and feelings attached to it.

I fail to see why a choice determined by some external force is not random and a choice determined by a self willing entity that is not reliant on any external determining force is "random". Both choices are determined but one is self determining.

However , if you are prepared to expand your imagination to include meaningful and rational choices within the set of choices you call "random" then I could accept it as a random choice. If you agree to accept that a random choice may well be also a meaningful choice then we can settle this one.

Originally posted by twhitehead
You clearly do not understand the purpose of punishment at all. Knightmeister has a similar problem as he believes in the Christian idea of punishment as a form of payment not as a method of correction.

In society we punish to correct behavior and occasionally as a form of revenge but that is an evolved tendency not a logical one. We do not punish beca ...[text shortened]... a random process?
knightmeister and you appear to be making that claim but hating the word.[/b]

Knightmeister has a similar problem as he believes in the Christian idea of punishment as a form of payment not as a method of correction. WHITEY

I think you will also find that there is a whole tradition of God using punishment and rebuke as a form of correction for those he loves.

Originally posted by knightmeister
That debate was about responsibility largely , we did not get on to a Christian theology of punishment or sin , it is an area we have not discussed.

It was quite clear in that thread that the computer believed that punishment was based on responsibility as per Christian theology and not for the purposes of correction/deterring/revenge. In fact his whole case rested on such a claim.

Originally posted by knightmeister
However , if you are prepared to expand your imagination to include meaningful and rational choices within the set of choices you call "random" then I could accept it as a random choice. If you agree to accept that a random choice may well be also a meaningful choice then we can settle this one.

I am not sure what you mean by 'meaningful' or 'rational'.
The dictionary definition of rational (1 a : having reason or understanding /Mariam Webster) does not fit your case as it is quite clear that the decision coming from your will does not have a reason.
If I throw a dice and it shows a six, the six is meaningful and random. However I would say that the fact that on this throw it showed a six is not meaningful at all. I think you are getting confused between the two types of meaning.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I am not sure what you mean by 'meaningful' or 'rational'.
The dictionary definition of rational (1 a : having reason or understanding /Mariam Webster) does not fit your case as it is quite clear that the decision coming from your will does not have a reason.
If I throw a dice and it shows a six, the six is meaningful and random. However I would say tha ...[text shortened]... is not meaningful at all. I think you are getting confused between the two types of meaning.

as it is quite clear that the decision coming from your will does not have a reason.
WHITEY


You think I am confused on meaning and reasons because you cannot imagine how a choice can be made without it being forced by a particular reason or cause. You cannot imagined a reasoned choice that is not forced and yet we have all made them. Just because a choice is unforced or not determined (inevitable) does not mean it has no meaning or rationale.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Just because a choice is unforced or not determined (inevitable) does not mean it has no meaning or rationale.

Actually it does. The random (unforced) component of the choice is just that. Without meaning or rational. You just don't like the idea so you try jump through hoops trying to avoid it but cant actually explain rationally how it works. You have even in the past suggested that they somehow work by via some complex time warp. ie whatever the result turns out to be, becomes the reason. You consistently refuse to see the obvious fact that the possible reasons that your will takes into account while making a decision are irrelevant to what we are discussing if the decision is unforced.
Maybe you will understand it better in computer code.
IF x>y+randomNumber THEN choose B.
without the random number the if statement is forced/deterministic. For the if statement to be unforced there must be a random input. That is a logical fact. You repeatedly try to confuse the issue by attempting to focus on the x>y part of the formula.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually it does. The random (unforced) component of the choice is just that. Without meaning or rational. You just don't like the idea so you try jump through hoops trying to avoid it but cant actually explain rationally how it works. You have even in the past suggested that they somehow work by via some complex time warp. ie whatever the result turns ou ...[text shortened]... You repeatedly try to confuse the issue by attempting to focus on the x>y part of the formula.

Actually it does. The random (unforced) component of the choice is just that. Without meaning or rational. You just don't like the idea so you try jump through hoops trying to avoid it but cant actually explain rationally how it works.WHITEY

All we are doing here is swapping statements about what we believe to be true. I am stating a position I cannot prove and so are you. One is not able to explain rationally how life came to be (with or without a God) but nevertheless exist it does. You have yet to prove that an unforced , self determining choice cannot have rationale and meaning. You are just stating it can't as an article of faith. At least I can own my faith.
You also have a belief system that says "if something cannot be explained it cannot be" and yet you cannot prove this either or explain why this belief is proven. We are in Goedle territory.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually it does. The random (unforced) component of the choice is just that. Without meaning or rational. You just don't like the idea so you try jump through hoops trying to avoid it but cant actually explain rationally how it works. You have even in the past suggested that they somehow work by via some complex time warp. ie whatever the result turns ou ...[text shortened]... You repeatedly try to confuse the issue by attempting to focus on the x>y part of the formula.

You consistently refuse to see the obvious fact WHITEY


...don't you mean "that which is self evident to me and not requiring of any proof as far as I am concerned"